Resourceshttp://www.desmogblog.com/taxonomy/term/7595/all
enAll the Positive and Helpful Things in the IPCC Report No One Will Talk Abouthttp://desmog.ca/2014/03/31/all-positive-and-helpful-things-ipcc-report-no-one-will-talk-about
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/iceberg%20sunrise.jpg?itok=_bV51yFF" width="200" height="108" alt="climate change, IPCC" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">If you’ve come across any of the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/31/science/earth/panels-warning-on-climate-risk-worst-is-yet-to-come.html?smid=tw-share&amp;_r=1">recent headlines</a> on the release of the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (<span class="caps">IPCC</span>) report, you’re probably feeling pretty low. The doom and gloom levels were off the charts. And understandably so. Major nations across the globe – especially Canada – are dragging their heels when it comes to climate change action. Canada, sadly, <a href="http://www.desmog.ca/2014/02/27/new-global-study-finds-canada-lagging-behind-china-climate-change-legislation">doesn’t have any climate legislation</a>.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">But maybe that’s because Canada was waiting for a group of the world’s most knowledgeable scientists to come up with a report for policy makers — you know, something to outline useful guidelines to keep in mind when looking to get your country out of the climate doghouse.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Well, Canada, you’re in luck. Here are some of the <span class="caps">IPCC</span> report’s most useful guidelines for responding to the multiple and growing threats of climate change:</span></p>
<!--break-->
<p class="rteindent1"><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">1. <strong>Start by making changes at the local level where and how they make sense.</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">There’s no single catch-all solution when it comes to a complex problem like global climate change. The report’s authors recommend taking a local approach that addresses “risk reduction and adaptation strategies” that attend to specific socioeconomic processes and needs. Oh, and don’t wait for the perfect local strategy — just pursue all solutions simultaneously, even if they overlap.</span></p>
<p class="rteindent1">2. <strong>We need change on all levels – from individual to government.</strong></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">The report is clear on this: federal governments should be fostering and supporting climate action on the subnational or municipal level. Federal governments can do this by protecting vulnerable groups – like <a href="http://desmog.ca/2013/05/23/beaver-lake-cree-judgment-most-important-tar-sands-case-you-ve-never-heard">constitutionally-protected First Nations in Canada</a>, for example – and having a diverse energy portfolio that doesn’t invest too heavily in highly polluting resources, like oilsands bitumen, for example. The authors also recommend governments spend time and money providing information to citizens, construct robust policy and legal frameworks to limit climate change-related risks and work with the private sector to ensure communities are adapting to a changing environment.</span></p>
<p class="rteindent1">3. <strong>Make everything better for everyone and that will help the climate issue. Seriously.</strong></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">If you work hard to “improve human health, livelihoods, social and economic well-being, and environmental quality” you’re pretty much guaranteed to make progress on the climate file. Governments should start working double-time on these fronts as a part of their climate change adaption and mitigation efforts. Co-benefits!</span></p>
<p class="rteindent1">4. <strong>Don’t be so single-minded.</strong></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Climate change in a way is the result of pursuing the objectives of a small sector of society. If we started to recognize “diverse interests, circumstances, social-cultural contexts, and expectations” that could “benefit decision-making processes.” So, if local communities are suffering as a result of new refineries, coal-fired power plants, oil export pipelines or the expansion of the oilsands — take the interests and needs of those local communities to heart. Giving too much sway to vested fossil-fuel interests is exacerbating climate change, after all. And anyway, “Indigenous, local, and traditional knowledge systems and practices, including indigenous peoples’ holistic view of community and environment, are a major resource for adapting to climate change.” We’ve got to stop ignoring these alternative perspectives.</span></p>
<p class="rteindent1">5. <strong>Be inclusive and gain support when decision-making.</strong></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Governments can be a little bad at this – including diverse groups in decision-making processes. But it turns out, the brightest minds are telling governments to be more sensitive to context when thinking through decisions, and to make those decisions in concert with more diverse groups represented in the process.</span></p>
<p class="rteindent1">6. <strong>Use the economy.</strong></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Economic instruments can “foster adaptation by providing incentives for anticipating and reducing impacts.” Investing in renewable and clean energy is a good place to start. And “improved resource pricing” might help too. Requiring companies to pay high prices for access to things like freshwater (for fracking companies, for example) or to extract carbon-intensive resources (the oilsands industry, for example) just makes sense.</span></p>
<p class="rteindent1">7. <strong>Invest in research and science.</strong></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">This is a recommendation fit for Canada: do science. Insufficient research, monitoring and observation can get in the way of making the right decisions and keeping the money flowing in the right direction.</span></p>
<p class="rteindent1">8. <strong>Plan and plan for the long-term.</strong></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">We tend to think short term, especially in the political realm. But that doesn’t work so well when we’re trying to resolve a long-term challenge on the immediate level. The report recommends getting serious about planning for the long term, to think ahead. This is crucial if we want to avoid making vulnerable groups more vulnerable.</span></p>
<p class="rteindent1">9. <strong>Figure out how much adaptation will cost.</strong></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">There’s little knowledge of the true costs of climate change adaptation on a global scale. Somebody, anybody, please start assessing this so we know when to put resources and where.</span></p>
<p class="rteindent1">10. <strong>Limiting climate change is a great way of avoiding adaptation costs. Who knew?!</strong></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"><span class="dquo">“</span>Co-benefits (there’s that word again!), synergies and tradeoffs” are just some of the great things that will come about from getting serious about addressing climate change. If we start using water, energy and land more efficiently, for example, we’re both limiting the causes of climate change while also preserving key resources for the future. Co-benefits come from many activities including energy efficiency, clean energy, reduced pollution, reduced water consumption, greening cities, recycling, practicing sustainable agriculture and forestry, preserving forests that also act as carbon stores. The benefits of practical and long-term decision-making just seem to be endless.</span></p>
<p class="rtecenter"><strong>Bonus guidelines</strong></p>
<p class="rteindent1">11. <strong>Start immediately.</strong></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">It turns out the sooner we get started limiting climate change, the more time we’ll have to adequate prepare for adaptation. Mitigation, the report’s authors state, “reduces the rate as well as the magnitude of warming.” So, best to get started right away.</span></p>
<p class="rteindent1">12. <strong>Seriously. Start immediately.</strong></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">If we let climate change get worse, we’re just making more work for ourselves. The best time to take advantage of those great co-benefits and synergies is now. The longer we wait, the more those benefits will decrease. And that’s already happening in some places: “In some parts of the world, insufficient responses to emerging impacts are already eroding the basis for sustainable development.”</span></p>
<p class="rteindent1">13. <strong>Overhaul your systems. Change it all, if it needs changing.</strong></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"><span class="dquo">“</span>Transformations in economic, social, technological, and political decisions and actions can enable climate-resilient pathways.” These kinds of changes don’t just help us respond to climate change but also help “improve livelihoods, social and economic well-being, and responsible environmental management.” And these kinds of transitions are a big deal when they’re supported by national governments. “Transformation is considered most effective when it reflects a country’s own visions and approaches to achieving sustainable development in accordance with their national circumstances and priorities.” But to do this well, we need to keep learning, be iterative, deliberate and innovate.</span></p>
<p>Well there you have it: the flipside of all those heavy risks and dark tales of drought, famine, violence and extinction.</p>
<p>The authors of the report make a compelling case for meaningful national change at the federal level. We just need to keep these guidelines in view as we work to implement future-oriented policy and practice at the local and federal level.</p>
<p><span style="font-size:10px;"><em>Image Credit: <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/32896099@N05/9116673445/in/photolist-eTBkoV-7zehD5-dMgaBS-aJeSAn-bvCib3-8wqHw5-dzpsfb-dziWpx-dMQSqx-dMQQ2P-dMWkLS-dMWiFC-dMWfcf-e7UT1Z-f8Rqmr-8uNzTH-cRqzVY-9aUVHf-aPiHBx-gkfw1U-cDQz9d-fD7Pag-9vCVev-giUuFM-cRqNqL-8v3r1q-8uZoQK-aHXnua-9SJW3E-e81wAU-dzpsA3-dzprk1-aJV71P-jwCoPg-jwFNwS-bFbNQG-f1EhuX">Ade Russell</a> via flickr</em></span></p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/676">IPCC</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/15762">Working Group II</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/939">climate change</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/3833">Climate</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1976">emissions</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1004">economy</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5693">Policy</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6383">Government</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2738">oilsands</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5133">fracking</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6180">water</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7595">Resources</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2031">clean energy</a></div></div></div>Tue, 01 Apr 2014 18:57:29 +0000Carol Linnitt7964 at http://www.desmogblog.comVan Harten: Canada "Recklessly" Entering Trans-Pacific Partnership, FIPA http://www.desmogblog.com/2012/12/13/van-harten-canada-recklessly-entering-trans-pacific-partnership
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/1882_20111030_POD.jpeg?itok=bANv0cWE" width="200" height="138" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Last week Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada <a href="http://www.international.gc.ca/media_commerce/comm/news-communiques/2012/12/03a.aspx?view=d">announced</a> Canada had “officially joined the latest round of Trans-Pacific Partnership (<span class="caps">TPP</span>) trade negotiations” after more than two and a half years of talks by previously engaged nations. The 15th round of talks, involving Australia, Brunei, Chile, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the <span class="caps">U.S.</span> and Vietnam, wrapped up yesterday in Auckland. </p>
<div>
The <span class="caps">TPP</span> has already been the cause of <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/25/trans-pacific-partnership-documents-sherrod-brown-jeff-merkley-ron-wyden-robert-menendez_n_1624956.html?">significant concern</a> in the <span class="caps">U.S.</span> where citizen groups and elected leaders have argued the agreement is shrouded in secrecy, leaving the American public to speculate about its consequences. This summer, after members of Congress complained corporate access to the trade documents superseded their own, <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/13/obama-trade-document-leak_n_1592593.html">leaked portions of the agreement</a> began to circulate online. </div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
At the time <a href="http://www.yesmagazine.org/new-economy/can-dracula-strategy-bring-trans-pacific-partnership-into-sunlight">Lori Wallach</a>, director of <a href="http://www.citizen.org/trade/">Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch</a>, <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/13/obama-trade-document-leak_n_1592593.html">said</a>, “the outrageous stuff in this leaked text may well be why <span class="caps">U.S.</span> trade officials have been so extremely secretive about these past two years of [trade] negotiations.”</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
During those two years, while Canada was vying for a seat at the <span class="caps">TPP</span> table, America made arguments that seemed to anticipate the furor Canadians would soon feel after the announcement of the Canada-China<a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2012/10/15/china-canada-investment-treaty-designed-be-straight-jacket-canada-exclusive-interview-trade-investment-lawyer-gus-van"> Foreign Investment Protection and Promotion Agreement</a>, or <span class="caps">FIPA</span>. </div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
Much like <span class="caps">FIPA</span>, the <span class="caps">TPP</span> grants unprecedented power to corporate entities with access to international tribunals that have the authority to overrule Canadian decisions regarding domestic policies that may apply to environmental regulation or reform, finance and labour policies and First Nations rights.</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
International investment lawyer and trade agreement expert, <a href="http://www.osgoode.yorku.ca/faculty/full-time/gus-van-harten">Gus Van Harten</a> told <em>DeSmog</em> that Canada is currently on track to become “the most locked in developed country in the world in investor-state arbitration.” He added, Canada is “proceeding recklessly” into this enfeebling agreement which will give “almost all foreign corporations in the country exceptional leverage to pressure governments behind closed doors.”</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
The Harper government is selling out Canada's long term sovereignty and prosperity in what appears as a thoughtless gamble, without so much as a financial risk assessment. As Van Harten puts it below, “We do not intend to slip on the sidewalk in winter, but we still check for ice.”</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
I asked Professor Van Harten 5 questions about the <span class="caps">TPP</span> and its relation to the politically-contentious <span class="caps">FIPA</span>. </div>
<!--break-->
<div>
</div>
<div>
<em>Carol Linnitt: What is the significance of Canada's entry into the <span class="caps">TPP</span>?</em></div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
Gus Van Harten: Alongside the Canada-China <span class="caps">FIPA</span> and the Canada-Europe <span class="caps">CETA</span> [<a href="http://www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/agr-acc/eu-ue/can-eu.aspx?view=d">Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement</a>], the <span class="caps">TPP</span> is very significant for Canada. These are part of the trio of trade or investment deals now pursued by the government and they are the most significant such deals for Canada since <span class="caps">NAFTA</span>.</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
<em><span class="caps">CL</span>: Is the <span class="caps">TPP</span> Agreement made public in Canada, either to citizens or elected officials? In other words, do we know what the <span class="caps">TPP</span> entails for Canada?</em></div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
<span class="caps">GVH</span>: A version of the <span class="caps">TPP</span> investment chapter was leaked over the summer. Other parts of the <span class="caps">TPP</span> may also have found their way on the public record. But, other than through such leaks, the <span class="caps">TPP</span> text would not be public or available to elected members of the legislature, in general, until the negotiations were concluded and agreed text was made public. So we can speculate, or rely on leaked documents, about the content of the treaty in order to analyze its potential implications.</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
<em><span class="caps">CL</span>: You have <a href="http://triplecrisis.com/reform-of-investment-treaties/">mentioned before </a>that entry into trade agreements of this nature force disputes of national interests to be settled by international arbiters. </em></div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
<span class="caps">GVH</span>: That is correct. The <span class="caps">TPP</span>, as proposed, would include an investor-state arbitration mechanism like the one in <span class="caps">NAFTA</span> Chapter 11 and, as proposed, in the Canada-China <span class="caps">FIPA</span> and the Canada-<span class="caps">EU</span> <span class="caps">CETA</span>. If Canada agrees to these various deals, it will be the most locked in developed country in the world in terms of investor-state arbitration.</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
This is in contrast the movement by some countries, such as Australia, India, and South Africa, away from investor-state arbitration due to its negative impacts on governments.</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
<em><span class="caps">CL</span>: Does the <span class="caps">TPP</span> favour corporate interests and trade expediency over national self-governance? Is Canada in danger of loosing its decision making authority over its own resources and trade preferences? Are we in essence giving up that control to corporations?</em></div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
<span class="caps">GVH</span>: Through this network of investor-state mechanisms Canada would give almost all foreign corporations in the country exceptional leverage to pressure governments behind closed doors and, if the companies were unsuccessful in this arm-twisting, to take their claims to arbitration tribunals where the process favours the corporate interest over those of governments, domestic companies, and other domestic constituencies.</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
It is a dangerous and unfortunate development, especially in light of how corporations have used these arbitration mechanisms to frustrate legitimate policy measures on the economy, financial regulation, taxation, public health, and the environment, for example.</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
<em><span class="caps">CL</span>: What are the similarities between <span class="caps">FIPA</span> and <span class="caps">TPP</span>? If Canadians are concerned about <span class="caps">FIPA</span> should they also be concerned about the <span class="caps">TPP</span>?</em></div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
<span class="caps">GVH</span>: The key similarity is that both contain an investor-state arbitration mechanism that gives special rights and protections to foreign companies to challenge any government decision outside of the Canadian legal system and Canadian courts in arbitration processes that are not independent, open, and fair in the manner of a court.</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
The difference lies in which country's foreign companies obtain these new rights and protections under each treaty. For the government to rush into the <span class="caps">FIPA</span> or the <span class="caps">TPP</span>, without doing proper risk assessments and legal analyses and without working out the constitutional issues that arise for provincial powers and First Nations rights is irresponsible. Other governments have pulled back from these arbitration mechanisms after they were hit with major lawsuits by major corporations; Canada has a chance to learn from this experience and avoid these outcomes but is proceeding recklessly in the face of evidence about the serious risks to taxpayers and constraints on voters.</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
For example, the federal government indicated, when asked, that it had not done a fiscal risk assessment of the Canada-China <span class="caps">FIPA</span> (although it raises a risk of multi-billion dollar awards against Canada) because it had no intention of violating the treaty. This was not a good answer.</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
We do not intend to slip on the sidewalk in winter, but we still check for ice.</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
Moreover, Canada has in various cases been found to have violated <span class="caps">NAFTA</span> and ordered to pay compensation to foreign companies, as have other countries under treaties with similar arbitration mechanisms.</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
<span style="font-size:9px;"><em>Image Credit: <a href="http://www.pm.gc.ca/eng/media_gallery.asp?media_category_id=1882&amp;media_category_typ_id=6#cont"><span class="caps">PMO</span> Photo Gallery</a></em></span></div>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11387">Trans-Pacific Partnership</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11388">TPP</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10525">FIPA</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10761">FIPPA</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11389">Foreign Investment Protection and Promotion Agreement</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11390">Canada-China Investment Treaty</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10436">Gus Van Harten</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11391">sellout</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10496">international tribunal</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11392">arbitration</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7595">Resources</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2327">environment</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6045">environmental policy</a></div></div></div>Thu, 13 Dec 2012 19:05:24 +0000Carol Linnitt6747 at http://www.desmogblog.comAmidst Record Drought, Report Shows Massive Water Requirements For Nonrenewable Fuelshttp://www.desmogblog.com/2012/09/20/title
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/NuclearPower_Getty_400.jpg?itok=kqEP0A9V" width="200" height="150" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>If you haven't heard about the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/12/opinion/sunday/extreme-weather-and-drought-are-here-to-stay.html?_r=0">major droughts</a> afflicting most of the <span class="caps">US</span> this summer, then you may just have your head in the sand (or more likely a water-parched dusty hole). In fact, the media department of the Drought Monitor website <a href="http://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/drought2012news.html">ran out of combinations</a> for modifying the words “intensify” and “widespread” when referring to the drought in their headlines.<br /><br />
Indeed, if you have been keeping tabs on the situation, “megadrought” and “<a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/news/20120822/severe-heat-drought-and-wildfires-state-climatologist-colorado-global-warming-climate-change-nolan-doesken">a new normal?</a>” sound highly familiar by now. With farmers nervous about a modern-day Dust Bowl taking hold, the question on everyone's mind is, how long will it last?<br /><br />
This visceral threat of water scarcity puts a <a href="http://www.civilsocietyinstitute.org/media/091912release.cfm">new report</a> about the true cost of fossil fuels in perspective. <a href="http://www.CivilSocietyInstitute.org/media/pdfs/091912%20Hidden%20Costs%20of%20Electricity%20report%20FINAL2.pdf">“The Hidden Costs of Electricity: Comparing the Hidden Costs of Power Generation Fuels”</a> evaluates, among other parameters, the water demands of fuel sources such as biomass, coal, nuclear, natural gas, solar, and wind.<br /><br />
In short, the nonrenewables like nuclear and coal use far more water to generate electricity than clean energy technologies like solar and wind. Take a look at how much water power plants need to function (mainly for the purpose of cooling):</p>
<!--break-->
<p class="rteindent1"><strong>Nuclear</strong></p>
<ul class="rteindent1"><li>
700 - 1,100 gallons per <span class="caps">MW</span>h (closed-loop systems)</li>
<li>
25,000 - 60,000 gal per <span class="caps">MW</span>h (open-loop)</li>
</ul><p class="rteindent1"><br /><strong>Coal</strong></p>
<ul class="rteindent1"><li>
500 - 600 gal per <span class="caps">MW</span>h (closed-loop)</li>
<li>
20,000 - 50,000 gal per <span class="caps">MW</span>h (open-loop)</li>
</ul><p class="rteindent1"><br /><strong>Biomass</strong></p>
<ul class="rteindent1"><li>
2.42 billion gal per 50 <span class="caps">MW</span> plant</li>
<li>
40,000 - 100,000 gal per <span class="caps">MW</span>h for irrigating crops to burn</li>
</ul><p class="rteindent1"><br /><strong>Solar</strong></p>
<ul class="rteindent1"><li>
225 - 520 gal per <span class="caps">MW</span>h (washing Photovoltaic panels)</li>
<li>
800 gal per <span class="caps">MW</span>h (Concentrating Solar Power wet method cooling)</li>
<li>
80 gal per <span class="caps">MW</span>h (<span class="caps">CSP</span> dry method cooling)</li>
<li>
1240 gal per <span class="caps">MW</span>h (Trough plant, wet)</li>
<li>
290 gal per <span class="caps">MW</span>h (Trough plant, dry)</li>
</ul><p class="rteindent1"><br /><strong>Wind</strong></p>
<ul class="rteindent1"><li>
45-85 gal per <span class="caps">MW</span>h</li>
</ul><p><br />
It's important to point out that the renewables' highest demand level is around 800 gal/<span class="caps">MW</span>h, which is comparable with the lowest levels of coal and nuclear's water usage and nowhere near the highest levels. If you include more extreme ways of extracting energy, methods like hydrofracking use <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2012/08/17/drought-fracking-coal-and-nukes-wreak-havoc-fresh-water-supplies">millions of gallons</a> to process natural gas.<br /><br />
This information is yet another reason why apologists for fossil fuels need to stop saying these resources are “cheap” forms of energy.<br /><br />
Says Geoff Keith, senior associate of Synapse Energy Economics Inc.,</p>
<blockquote>
“Too often left out of the equation are a number of important ‘hidden’ costs, also called ‘indirect’ or ‘externalized’ costs, associated with each generation technology. These include costs to society such as depletion of water and other resources, air and water pollution, detrimental impacts on human health and the environment, and contributions to global climate change. While direct costs (the monetary cost to build and operate a generating plant) are important to consumers, so too are these indirect costs, whether or not they can be easily expressed in monetary terms.”</blockquote>
<p><br />
If policymakers did consider externalized costs, fossil fuels become significantly less alluring as a major energy source. Much of the rest of the world doesn't even have access to safe drinking water - meaning that our society should make it a higher priority to preserve water for food growth and drinking purposes, not wasteful, outdated energy technologies.</p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2010">drought</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6028">megadroughts</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7595">Resources</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/fossil-fuels">fossil fuels</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6349">hydrofracking</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/662">coal</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1286">oil</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5579">Wind</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6443">solar</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/722">renewable energy</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10259">externalized costs</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10260">true cost</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10261">Synapse Energy Economics</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10262">Drought Monitor</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5133">fracking</a></div></div></div>Mon, 24 Sep 2012 01:21:09 +0000Laurel Whitney6537 at http://www.desmogblog.comUK Fracking Company Takes Partial Responsibility For Earthquakeshttp://www.desmogblog.com/uk-fracking-company-takes-partial-responsibility-earthquakes
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/Fracking-illustration-001_0.jpg?itok=pz2FfN__" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>U.K.-based energy company Cuadrilla Resources** has <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/02/english-tremors-cuadrilla-resources_n_1071088.html">finally admitted</a> that their hydraulic fracturing activities were likely to blame for a series of small earthquakes that shook areas of Britain around fracking sites earlier this year. The company was the only energy company in the <span class="caps">U.K.</span> that used fracking to extract natural gas until the entire practice was put on hold in late Spring while the company and government officials investigated the cause of the earthquakes.<br /><br />
Cuadrilla claims in a new report that the earthquakes that occurred in April and May of this year were caused by an “unusual combination” of both geology and their fracking activities. However, they’ve assured officials that such a combination, and resulting earthquakes, were not likely to happen again. <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/02/english-tremors-cuadrilla-resources_n_1071088.html">The Associated Press said</a>, “But the report estimated that in the 'unlikely scenario,' that fracking kicked off another tremor, its maximum magnitude would be about 3 – meaning it would probably barely be felt if at all.”<br /><br />
DeSmogBlog <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/fracking-uk-causing-earthquakes">covered the earthquakes earlier this year</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
One earthquake occurred in April and measured a 2.3 on the Richter scale, and another occurred last week measuring 1.5 in magnitude. Both quakes happened at the same time and in the same location where the Cuadrilla Resources energy company was <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-06-01/u-k-explorer-suspends-shale-gas-drilling-after-earthquake.html">actively fracking gas wells</a>. No significant damage was reported from either earthquake.<br /><br />
The British Geological Survey suggests that the earthquakes are a result of fracking, as gas and oil drilling has been known to cause small earthquakes in other areas of the world.</blockquote>
<p>Fracking operations in the <span class="caps">U.K.</span> remain suspended as government officials continue investigating the earthquakes and review Cuadrilla’s report.<br /><br />
**DeSmogBlog contributor Graham Readfearn points out that <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/mining-energy/mining-services-company-aj-lucas-holds-55pc-stake-in-uks-huge-gas-discovery/story-e6frg9df-1226163384093">Cuadrilla is 55 per cent owned by an Australian company, Lucas</a>. </p>
<!--break--></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/uk">UK</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5133">fracking</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5137">hydraulic fracturing</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5648">Report</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6383">Government</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6566">Earthquake</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7594">Caudrilla</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7595">Resources</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7596">England</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7597">fracking earthquakes</a></div></div></div>Wed, 02 Nov 2011 19:02:31 +0000Farron Cousins5828 at http://www.desmogblog.com